Posted on 12/20/2007 3:32:58 PM PST by shield
FORT WORTH (CBS 11 News) ― The Star of Bethlehem has befuddled scholars throughout the ages. Now, a Texas law professor claims to have scientific proof that the Star was real, and not purely biblical myth. He has another major discovery as well, which resulted from his study of the Star.
Texas A&M adjunct law professor Frederick Larson began researching the Star after putting up a nativity scene for his daughter. The lawyer in him, Larson said, required him to investigate what it was that he was putting up in his front yard. Beginning with the book of Matthew, he ended up on a decade-long odyssey into astronomy.
Larson is emphatic in saying that, although his quest was initially faith-driven, it became much more. "If I'm going to make a star hypothesis," he said, "I want to know, what did it do? Was it an angel? Was it a comet? Was it a myth?"
Although his story begins with one man's journey into the skies, it ends an unfathomable truth for some, that Larson said will change the way the world sees the Star of Bethlehem forever.
The Star of Bethlehem echoes the symphonic sounds of verses like "a star, a star, twinkles in the night" and "these three Kings of Orient are," along with oil masterpieces like 'The Adoration of the Magi.'
These pieces tell a story laid out in the Gospels. "Behold… where is the one who has been born King of the Jews? We have come to worship him (Matthew: Chapter 2)." This is a quintessential verse pointed to by scholars, of the Magi being led by a star to the Christ child, the King of the Jews, as they approached King Herod for direction to His location in Jerusalem more than 2,000 years ago.
Based on the three laws of planetary motion by German mathematician and physicist Johannes Kepler, Larson developed a video presentation using modern-day software. This new software can pinpoint events in the sky for any day of any year.
Larson first had to approximate the death of King Herod, which, based on the writings of ancient Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, most scholars presume to be about 4 B.C. But Larson said he found a recent discovery that states a printing error occurred in the 14th Century. The error had incorrectly printed Josephus' presumption of Herod's death. This caused scholars to look at the wrong date in researching the Star of Bethlehem. "All the oldest manuscripts, before 1544, are consistent with Herod having died in 1 B.C.," Larson said. "That opens up the possibility for us to look in the years 2 and 3 B.C. There, the sky explodes!"
Many scholars have hypothesized the conjunction of planets theory before, but Larson said that alone might not have been anything spectacular to stargazers 2,000 years ago.
Something did happen, however, that was much more profound -- a triple conjunction of Jupiter, Venus and the star Regulus on April 3, 2 B.C., and a new moon. "What you had was two stars stacked on top of each other," Larson explained. "To an observer, it appeared to be the brightest star anyone had ever seen." Larson described it as an astronomical event that hasn't happened again in the 20th Century.
Larson also hedges much of his hypothesis on the existence of this Star phenomenon on nine points taken from Matthew. This includes: it rose in the east, it endured over time (eliminating that it could have been a comet or a meteor) and that it stopped over the place where the Christ child was born.
The last point has driven many people away from the idea that a Star of Bethlehem ever existed, but Larson said, although it is astronomically impossible for a star to "stop" over something, it did because of something called retrograde motion. "Wandering stars move around in a field of fixed stars, causing it to appear as though they're moving," Larson said. The Star would've appeared to move and stop.
Larson has come up against rigorous criticism from the scientific community for what they see as a religious approach to a scientific issue.
SMU adjunct professor of astronomy and physics John Cotton said Larson's approach is flawed, in part because he did not research ancient astrology. Cotton points to the work of modern-day astronomer Michael Molnar, who spent three years researching ancient astrologers to arrive at his Star hypothesis.
For starters, Cotton said, Molnar begins with the presumption of the time of Christ's birth as more plausible in 6 B.C., as the skies look much different in that year. He said that ancient astrologers and astronomers, such as what the Magi were said to have been, would have been in tune with the symbolism of the stars. Molnar puts the Star in line with Aries the Ram versus Larson's Leo theory.
Cotton said, "If it fits what you know, with the Matthew story, and it fits the ancient astrology then it's a reasonable candidate. [Larson's work] is nothing new because it was proposed years ago."
Other religious scholars said that there is no real consensus as to the exact time of birth or death of Jesus, thereby making any hypothesis on the Star of Bethlehem irrelevant.
According to biblical scholar Bruce Alan Killian, if one were to go by the astrology of the times as Cotton asserts, "Venus, called the wandering star by ancients, rose before sunrise on August 24, 2 B.C. and fulfilled prophecies in Jacob. Jesus called himself the bright morning star (Revelations 22:16)."
Looking at Larson's hypothesis of Venus rising as a conjunction with Jupiter (the King planet) and Regulus (the King star), and the fact that Jacob calls Judah a lion in Genesis 49:9-10, according to Larson, "You can choose to see what you want, but, from the symbolic perspective, I see King, King, King everywhere."
Larson admits that he is riding on the backs of many great historians, scientists and scholars with his work, but added, "You begin by unearthing everything that's already been discovered and add to it." He said he respects and appreciates many great names in science on this subject, including the work of Molnar.
On the issue of adding value to the existing research, Larson said, "I resist just being a storyteller. What is new is the poem. The poem is a new discovery and it is striking." The poem is, in theory, an arch of symbolic celestial and astronomical events, Larson said, that began with the Star and a new moon at Christ's conception or birth.
Larson's presentation does, however, bring the Star of Bethlehem to life. His project brings color and clarity to a subject often too complicated and detailed for the layman to understand. If you are interested in seeing a purely scientific approach, the Museum of Natural Science at Fair Park will have their "Mystery of the Star" exhibit beginning December 3rd and running through the 21st.
September 29th, is HIS BIRTH DATE 4BC. [15th Ethanim/Tirsi=Sept 29th] HE was made flesh December 25th [conceived]. Human gestation is 280 days = 40 weeks for perfect human gestation = Sept 29th. Per Dr. E W Bullinger’s Companion Bible [1909] in his Appendixes.
Multivac ponders this question for Eternity and eventually all the stars have worn out and the Universe is just dregs of expended energy. Multivac had encorporated all of mankind into his higher order self and finally when the answer appeared he said,
"Let there be Light!" I read over 150 of Asimov's Books!
Ping
bttt
That’s is NOT a good number. It’s the number for the anti-christ system we all live in today.
>>but looking to “printing errors” in the 4th Century (1000 years before printing!) to explain what you want to swallow<<
The printing errors were in the FOURTEENTH century, not the 4th century.
What else did you miss in the article that lead you to criticize it?
In any case, my point is still valid, a lot of what people think they know about the nativity is just pap fed to them by marketers and media.
My Bible doesn't have a book called Revelations.
You must not have a real Bible. It’s the last book of the Bible. I don’t know of a Holy Bible that doesn’t have ‘The Book of Revelations.’
I think you’re the one with the fake Bible if you have a book called Revelations.
bump
Hint: It’s “Revelation”, not “Revelations”.
Some folks call it The Revelation of John when in fact it is The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Go online...there are Bibles online and look at it...then go to Revelations or go to a book store and look at the Bibles they ALL have 'The Book of Revelation' last book in the bible.
Oppss missed the S
Apology accepted.
Wow, that was really profound. Thanks!
Do either of you have scientific proof that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, exists? I know I don't.
Rowan is a tree, that had powerful symbolic meaning for the Druids; the AofC is the powerful symbol of the Anglican Church.
The Rowan is in the rose family. Roses of various colors are symbolic of the ruling Houses of England, later The United Kingdom. The AofC is the titular ruler of the Anglican Church.
Williams is a Majestic Plural of William, the great Conqueror of England. The Anglican Church 'conquered' England, driving out all competitors, before fading.
The Anglican Church remembers, and would like to once again rule.
All of this, plus much more that I have neither time nor space for here, point to "Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams' being just a mythological character, incorporated into Anglican belief....
I do have a book called Revelation in my Bible. Where did I say otherwise?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.